Methodology
ElonFantasy is a public accountability platform that scans posts on X (formerly Twitter) from high-profile politicians, tech leaders, and media figures. It uses AI to detect contradictions and flip-flops, then scores each profile on consistency, accuracy, and value alignment. The goal is radical transparency: anyone can look up an influential person and see a documented, sourced record of what they said versus what they did.
Editorial Disclaimer
Truth Scores represent AI-assisted editorial judgment, not objective fact. Our system uses large language models to detect semantic contradictions and assess consistency. These assessments are probabilistic and may contain errors. We encourage users to review the source material and draw their own conclusions.
Scoring System
Each tracked figure receives a composite Truth Score from 0 to 100, calculated from three weighted sub-scores:
| Sub-Score | Weight | Measures |
|---|---|---|
| Consistency | 40% | Semantic similarity between past and present statements on the same topic |
| Accuracy | 35% | Factual claims cross-referenced against public records and fact-checking databases |
| Value Alignment | 25% | Comparison of stated values/principles against observed behavior and policy decisions |
Truth Score = (Consistency x 0.4) + (Accuracy x 0.35) + (Alignment x 0.25)
Verdict Tiers
Exceptionally consistent; actions closely match stated values
Rarely contradicts; generally reliable and principled
Mostly consistent but with notable inconsistencies
Frequent flip-flops; positions shift with convenience
Documented pattern of contradicting prior statements
Persistent, severe contradictions across core stated values
Contradiction Detection
Our AI pipeline identifies contradictions through a multi-step process:
- Posts are collected from public X accounts via the X API
- All posts are fed to Kimi K2 for semantic contradiction analysis
- The AI identifies post pairs with genuinely incompatible positions on the same topic
- A valid contradiction requires: the same subject matter, meaningfully opposing positions, and cannot be explained by new information or an acknowledged change of mind
- Each contradiction is assigned a severity score (1 = minor, 2 = clear, 3 = major)
- Sub-scores are calculated based on contradiction volume, severity, and factual accuracy
Data Sources
All content is sourced from public posts on X (Twitter). We do not access or display private messages, deleted posts, or any non-public information. Engagement metrics (likes, retweets) are used for weighting high-signal posts but do not directly affect scores.
Dispute Process
If a public figure or their representative believes a contradiction has been incorrectly flagged, they can submit a dispute through our contact form. Disputes are reviewed by our editorial team and AI reassessment. Legitimate disputes (e.g., acknowledged position changes with new information) will result in the contradiction being updated or removed.